|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 7th, 2006, 08:52 AM | #106 |
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 1,564
|
anyone know when this is going to be available so people can check out the visual quality?
__________________
bow wow wow |
August 7th, 2006, 09:23 AM | #107 | |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Quote:
AVC HD cams are out in pre-production models, and the shipping models are expected in the next month. As soon as we're released from NDA, we can put up footage. AVC Intra, I don't have any knowledge of these products whatsoever.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
|
August 7th, 2006, 09:42 AM | #108 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 295
|
Quote:
|
|
August 7th, 2006, 12:49 PM | #109 |
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 1,564
|
hte one for consumers, which is intra- i believe.
i'm assuming the AVC-HD is for pros.
__________________
bow wow wow |
August 7th, 2006, 12:56 PM | #110 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 295
|
Quote:
|
|
August 7th, 2006, 01:06 PM | #111 | |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Quote:
Prefiltering, DSP, glass, and a host of other related components and processes determine the majority of the image. All of those components add up in cost, and with AVC HD aimed at consumers, the goal is quality control and cost reduction, not a raise in quality that would carry a price level along with it.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
|
August 7th, 2006, 02:58 PM | #112 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 295
|
Quote:
|
|
August 7th, 2006, 05:31 PM | #113 | |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Quote:
It's ridiculous that any of this speculation ever came about (not pointing at you, Lawrence) about AVC in the professional world. It's a consumer format, was developed as such, and currently implemented only as such. More compression is not a good thing, it's a bad thing, overall. Talking about comparisons of AVC vs HDV, is seriously misguided, particularly when discussion of AVC-I comes into the mix. It's all conjecture, and from my own viewpoint, it seems like an attempt to divert focus from one format to another, even though the "other" format is mere conjecture and non-existent at this point in time. It's frustrating, because while it's apparent folks want more picture for less cost, AVD HD is * not* the answer. There are a lot of problems with it as a broadcast format in it's current inception, ranging from the complexity of the deblocking algorithms to the bitrate, etc. It's even more frustrating to see discussions of AVC-I come into the AVC HD discussions. *IF* AVC-I comes to fruition, it will first likely be based on the consumer codec, as development of a new compliant codec will be so expensive it would easily put the cam out of cost-range for most, and second, once it is out in whatever inception, it will be more in the mid-camera price range, I'll wager, even if based on the consumer codec. For some reason, folks seem to tie much of the AVC HD excitement back to "MPEG sucks." No, MPEG doesn't suck, *some* MPEG encoders suck. For the most part, there is no spec for MPEG encoding . From HDV to HDCAM SR, MPEG is in constant production use, whether it's Canon, JVC, Sony, or others using this format. The temporal compression allows for big frames (in other words, full size frames) as opposed to other popular formats that have small frames that are then expanded on output or in post, using header information to control the conversion. This is why some formats are seen as "soft" by many folks vs what the HDV camcorders offer. AVC HD is a great little format, designed for delivering very good quality content over small bandwidth, which makes it easy to store on mem sticks, microdrives, 3" DVDs, and other consumer-friendly formats. It's incredibly efficient, very cheap codec to license, and "good enough" for consumer use without a lot of processing for acquisition. When the Sony cams start shipping, it's expected you'll see a lot of comparison to the HDV output, and I just hope a lot of folks are not disappointed if they're waiting to make decisions on whether to buy a Sony, Canon, or JVC HDV camcorder over the Sony AVC HD camcorders for professional or semi-professional use. Based on what I'm seeing, they likely will be. We *really* need to get an AVC-I forum going, because discussion of AVC-I in this forum is like discussing XDCAM HD in the HDV fora. It's confusing, and is leaving more questions than answers for some folks.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
|
August 7th, 2006, 06:36 PM | #114 |
Barry Wan Kenobi
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,863
|
never mind...
Last edited by Barry Green; August 7th, 2006 at 07:12 PM. |
August 8th, 2006, 02:28 AM | #115 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
AVCHD is only up to twice as efficient at low bitrates. Once you hit 18Mbps or so, efficiency is not tremendously different than HDV or any other MPG-derived format. The efficiency by comparison diminishes as bitrate rises. Processing coefficients become more challenging, processing horsepower goes up substantially. All things considered it actually becomes less efficient overall at high bitrates. With current development, the gains don't offset the costs. But, like anything else, this is likely to change.
It's significantly more compressed than HDV or any other heretofore format. This presents problems. Have you attempted to edit AVC HD yet? Try it. You're throwing away more information than ever before, and complex frames suffer if you keep the spatial values intact. The audio benefits significantly in the AVC format, since there aren't any significant restrictions on audio formats for MP4 and audio isn't interleaved as it is in HDV. That said, I've not run into any of the heavily purported audio problems that some assign to HDV. Press releases from Sony are press releases from the consumer division of the company. You know that just as well as I do. Bending words doesn't benefit anyone. Sony Broadcast didn't do a press release for the HC1, HC3... the consumer division did. Just as the same division announced the AVC HD format. Sanyo says "We're redefining High Definition...." Would you suggest we accept the HD1 is "redefining" HD in the professional or prosumer realm? Will AVC grow? Obviously. Will it be the current AVC-HD profile as the foundation? Maybe. Will it be AVC-I? Perhaps. Dunno. Way too early to tell. But the bottom line for now is that AVC HD as it stands is a budget format. It might grow into something else, I hope it does. All that said, I do understand the position; Panasonic desperately needs this story to offset the small frame antiquated format of DVCPro and it's DV-based variants. It's likely ill-affordable to create their own codec and expect to develop a competitively priced camcorder. They need something that will record to P2 and other static media easily in big frame format, so AVC becomes a logical answer. Of course they need to champion it as it's another opportunity to bash MPEG 2. Ironically, AVC is a subset of the MPEG 2 that's been bashed for the past two years. More ironic is that the 4:2:0 colorspace is now acceptable when for the past two years, it hasn't been acceptable. Regardless of what you or I say, feel, want, or believe....AVC HD is at this time is aimed squarely at low-cost buyers and non-professional user. Neither of the two announced camcorders have professional features included. I can say with at least some surety that Sony, Canon, JVC, Grass Valley, and Ikegami aren't doing anything with it on the professional/semiprofessional side at this point, but I'm equally confident you're speaking for Panasonic, and they're a big player (Grass Valley's MPEG 4 is not AVC). We might as well be discuss MPG 7 and MPG 21-based camcorders too. After all, they're part of the various future mpeg profiles too. If we're relying on conjecture to generate a new market or discourage users from a current market, we might should go deeper into the realm of "maybe." Next year, the year after...AVC HD or one of it's variants could be the new DV. A lot could happen in the next 24 months. But the issue we're faced with here, now, and in this particular forum, is that folks are being grossly mislead about what AVC HD currently is, and what it will be for at least some time to come. It's currently only leading to great confusion.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
August 8th, 2006, 07:16 AM | #116 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 888
|
I have the money to buy and I will by the time the new Canon's come out. It looks to me like HDV is pretty well dug in for now. I've seen some really good stuff shot with the Z1U. I'm sure this canon will be there too.
I think Panasonic made a mistakes by not having a DVX100 type camera with HDV. They bet on P2 but the cost is just to high for a lot of people. If they would have came out with a 16:9/SD/HDV they would have sold like crazy. When you hear the AVCHD talk it is usually just to make HDV look bad. It's once AVC comes out HDV will dry up and blow away. But if it is that good so will the SD DVX100 and all other SD cameras. I will spend my money now on the Canon A1 or maybe if Sony comes out with something new by October. |
August 8th, 2006, 07:25 AM | #117 | |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Quote:
|
|
August 8th, 2006, 01:52 PM | #118 | |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 844
|
Quote:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....6&postcount=21 regards |
|
August 8th, 2006, 02:54 PM | #119 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 888
|
Quote:
I guess none of these companies can please everyone. I'll just be glad to have something again in the next couple of months. |
|
August 8th, 2006, 03:04 PM | #120 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 295
|
Not to challenge you, Douglas, but you seem to be painting AVCHD with an excessively broad brush in your attempt to portray it as a consumer format. A few points:
Last edited by Lawrence Bansbach; August 8th, 2006 at 06:09 PM. |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|